아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강요행위등)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.
Sexual assault against the defendant for forty hours.
The lower court dismissed the prosecution as to the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation) and assault, among the facts charged in the instant case, and convicted the remainder of the facts charged.
Since only the defendant appealed against the conviction part and the dismissal part of the public prosecution which the defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal is separated, this part is excluded from the scope of the trial in this Court.
The decision of the court below on the grounds of appeal is unfair because the punishment imposed on the defendant (the imprisonment of four years and six months) is too unreasonable.
Judgment
The Defendant: (a) forced the victim to engage in sexual traffic by threatening him/her to purchase and provide tobacco to the victim who is a juvenile; (b) forced him/her to use the proceeds of sexual traffic for his/her habitual gambling funds; (c) the victim committed an attempted crime against the male sexual traffic; and (d) requested the victim to take pictures of sexual intercourse or send an obscene message. In light of the period, frequency, and method of the crime, the liability for the crime is very heavy.
In particular, the crime of coercion and extortion of sexual traffic of this case takes the victim who is a juvenile whose sexual values have not been established properly as a means of economic profit-making means. Accordingly, the victim was exposed to physical risks along with a considerable mental suffering (the victim actually experienced pregnancy and miscarriage) and it seems to have a negative effect on forming sexual identity and values in the future.
Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.
On the other hand, there is no criminal history except for the defendant's suspension of indictment by fraud, and the defendant and the victim were in a pet relationship as they were at the time of the instant case.